( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the quashing of an order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation Bareilly rejecting the petitioners revision against an order of the Settlement Officer Bareilly. The case of the petitioner is that she and certain other persons were co-tenure holders with equal shares in a joint holding in village Churai Dalpatpur in bareilly. The petitioner had her holding partitioned under Section 10-A of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. She states that after the partition her plots were equal in quality to those of the other members of her family who are respondents 4 to 6 in this petition. The plots were also situate in the same area. In the consolidation proceedings a statement of proposals was drawn up. Under it the respondent Baldeo Prasad was given all the plots of his choice while the petitioners claim of plots of her choice was ignored. She was allotted plots of inferior quality and given two chaks in block A which were away from the village and situate in opposite directions. Aggrieved by the proposals she filed an objection before the Consolidation Offiner which was rejected. Her appeal be